William E. Colleran: Of, by, and for the politically-wired lawyers

Fed up with corruption and political nepotism emanating from the State House, the people of Rhode Island enacted a strong ethics code in a 1986 constitutional convention.Article III, Section 8, of the...

Comment

By
William E. Colleran
Posted Nov. 1, 2013 @ 12:01 am

Fed up with corruption and political nepotism emanating from the State House, the people of Rhode Island enacted a strong ethics code in a 1986 constitutional convention.

Imagine the General Assembly’s establishing an Ethics Commission as a catalyst for ethics reform. What could possibly go wrong?

The law the Assembly passed “established an independent and nonpartisan Rhode Island ethics commission composed of nine members appointed by the governor,” from lists submitted by the General Assembly.

The Assembly further stipulated a single, five-year term, “provided, however, that each member shall continue to serve until his or her successor is appointed and qualified.” We shall see what mischief that legal argle-bargle has caused.

The Ethics Commission was recently in the news (“Licht declared exempt from ‘revolving door’ law,” news, Oct. 9). With more lawyers than ordinary citizens, the commission voted to accept Richard Licht’s laughable assertion that, as director of administration, he is but the governor’s amanuensis, without the ability to set policy. It issued a narrowly focused advisory opinion that Mr. Licht is not in a senior policy making, discretionary or confidential position, and thus may apply for a judgeship without waiting the required year.

The advisory opinion did not share with the public how the individual members voted.

I’ve written in the past about the Ethics Commission’s rulings and the subject of the revolving door (“Ethics panel destroys public’s trust,” Commentary, June 16, 2000). In a nutshell, in 1998, an Ethics Commission, with but one lawyer member, passed a “zero-tolerance” policy limiting gifts that public servants could accept. Unhappy, Gov. Lincoln Almond, with the assistance of General Assembly leadership, then packed the commission with six lawyers. The results were predictable.

The present Ethics Commission looks like the Fountain Street branch meeting of the Rhode Island Bar Association. A commission initially composed of citizens has morphed into a lawyer-laden clutch. Why?

The leadership of the General Assembly has been and continues to be controlled by lawyers. The leaders work with lawyers, hire lawyers and are wined and dined by lawyer-lobbyists. Thus, their world appears to be narrowly circumscribed — to paraphrase Abraham Lincoln: “government of the politically-wired lawyers, by the politically-wired lawyers, for the politically-wired lawyers.”

It should be noted that the Ethics Commission employs an executive director/prosecutor and four staff attorneys as well as a legal counsel to help with those nagging legal questions.

As stated earlier, the ethics commissioners are appointed for single, five-year terms. Their replacements are drawn from a list provided by the original source (House speaker, Senate president, etc.).

From the Rhode Island Ethics Commission website (www.ethics.ri.gov/about/), we find several lapsed appointments:

•Ross Cheit, chairman: term, 2004-2009; appointed chairman in April 2011.

•Frederick K. Butler: term, 2005-2010.

•Mark Heffner: term, 2006-2011.

•Edward A. Magro: term, 2006-2011.

•James V. Murray, appointed by the governor in 1998; term, 2003-2008.

Mr. Murray’s name sounded familiar. I re-read my article of 2000 and found that he was one of the lawyers who voted for the lobbyists over the people. So why are several commissioners serving beyond their terms?

All these lapsed seats are held by men with law degrees. The commission has but one woman serving. When it comes to diversity, our one-term governor has a way to go. With these five vacancies, perhaps he can restore balance to the Ethics Commission. Lawyers make up less than one percent of the population; women, 51 percent. We need more women, and fewer lawyers.

What could be wrong with that? Think of the ethics lessons we learned at our mother’s knee.

It should be an easy enough task for the General Assembly to modify the ethics law by deleting “until his or her successor is appointed” and adding “The vacancy shall be filled within 60 days from a list provided by the original provider. If no list is forthcoming, the governor shall, after publicly broadcasting the vacancy, make the appointment within 30 days.”

Perhaps the House speaker, Senate president and the other authorities have been too busy, distracted or prefer the status quo. Now they are on notice.

William E. Colleran (wecolleran@aol.com), of Bristol, is a retired engineer.